Having never played any Scriabin pieces, nor knowing much about his output (except for that one popular etude), I am in need of some guidance as to where a good place would be for me to start. Aryobrand has graciously offered to help and of course all you other members are welcome to add any insights you may have, as well.

Here is a general idea of what I would desire:

I’d like try out pieces from each of Scriabin’s three periods – that sounds very interesting to me – to hear how he changed. I like shorter pieces, like fewer than five pages long, and I prefer any tempi slower than vivace. Difficulty level – anything under really-hard-crazy advanced. Tone – “romantic ... harsh ... evil and twisted ... lascivious ... passionate ... etc” I like all of those things.

Hope that helps to narrow it down.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

First of all, Welcome to the Dark Side. MWAHAHAHAHAHA Are you sure you wish to proceed? ... ... if so, then let's get started.

That out of the way, you mention that you would like shorter pieces. How short? Some of Scriabin's pieces are one page long. Like:

Prelude, Op.16, No. 4 or No.5 (technically first period, starting the transition to second)
(I've noticed there is a version of No.4 on the site, but I personally feel that he's way too free with the tempo and looses some of the rhythmic emphasis...and some of the exactness of the figures... but ah, well ...also, see my note later on approaching Scriabin)
...
but wait, before we start looking through for performance pieces...

Actually, I just realized that I would need to first ask more questions, so in the mean time check out Scriabin's Preludes Op.16 and 17. Anything from Op.11 is well loved, but I'd rather try to find something that's not played as much, yet is still rather beautiful, moving, etc.

While you're looking at the previous two Opus (Opi?), I need to know how comfortable are you with polyrhythms? Scriabin loved to use 'unusual' time signatures and rhythmic figures and some of them can get quite complex. Look at Opus 16, No.3 and tell me how comfortable you would be with the right hand near the end - (don't play the 5's as 6's! or rubato them over! use a metronome for this assessment). (Again there is a recording of this but it's too free with the tempo and there's not enough attention paid to the phrasing, dynamics, esp where r.h. not same as l.h., etc - I don't want to sound like I'm picking on anyone and haven't really seen if the performer would appreciate my sometimes vitriolic critique so I'll leave it at that.) This is Scriabin at some of his most Chopinesque, especially the lead from measures 24 through 27. For Scriabin this isn't much since the left hand is in straight four throughout. I would like to see you try something more challenging, but if someone is not used to playing Scriabin sometimes the modulations of tonality are enough of a challenge. Give me some more feedback about this particular piece (i.e. Op.16, No.3) whether you feel comfortable enough to try something more challenging - and I'm confident that you would be.

Also give me some feedback regarding 3 Morceaux, Op.52 especially No 1, Poeme. This has a few tricky polyrhythmic figures but not too many and is obviously from his final period. I'm suggesting some of these to begin with not necessarily as pieces to choose for a final recording but rather to let me know which direction you'd like to explore first.

That should give you a few to go through for now. I'd be impressed if you started one of his Piano Sonatas, but they're usually much longer and more complex; and Scriabin wrote a LOT of his Preludes and Etudes based on figures that he more fully develops in the Piano Sonatas. At least look over the rhythms of Piano Sonata, No. 7, Op.64 especially measures 29-59, and again at measure 169 and onward (Tempo I - foudroyant [babelfish says "striking down"]). Although I'm confident you could master this piece, it might be a bit much to start with, but look it over from a speed that's comfortable with a focus upon the rhythmic figures (maybe a metronome ). Remember with Scriabin, I feel it's MOST important to start out learning the piece in STRICT tempo, then later after you've 'gotten' the rhythm...

(sometimes it takes me three or four attempts to even understand what Scriabin was trying to say - both rhythmically AND melodically, but when you do 'get it', it will be unmistakable. Sometimes I've found myself leaping up from the piano bench exclaiming "Yes!!! Yes!!! How &j8(*4ing beautiful!!! How &j8(*4ing perfect!!!". So remember that if the first time you play through it, if it sounds atonal, then look at it again. In my experience with Scriabin's music, I have NEVER found ANYTHING of Scriabin's that is atonal. He just experimented on the edges of known tonality even incorporating Eastern/Middle Eastern style scales (such as in Prelude Op.67,No.1), and sometimes he likes to change keys A LOT (such as Piano Sonata No.3, Op. 23 especially IV measures 174-182ish), etc. Also please note, that once you 'get it', you can never go back!!! Are you sure you wish to proceed? MWAHAHAHAHA If you are sure then let's proceed, but know that you will never look at music quite the same way ever again.)

...later after you've 'gotten' the rhythm, then and only then should you add rubato and feeling, etc.

I feel almost an obligation to ask you to consider yet a third time and final time if you're ready to cross over. For if you choose to proceed, you might find yourself listening to and playing music so exalted, so passionate, so transcendant, that the uninitiated will merely look at you strangely, and exclaim "WHAT is THAT?". You will become a partaker of the deeper Mysterium of Scriabin. and if so, then WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME I hope I didn't scare you too much.

I'll be eagerly awaiting your views/choices for further exploration...

Love is the law, love under will.
Aryobrand

P.S. Almost all of Scriabin's Piano Music is published in three volumes from Dover Books:
1 The Complete Preludes and Etudes for Pianoforte Solo
2 Mazurkas, Poemes, Impromptus and other Works for Piano
3 Complete Piano Sonatas
Since these are Dover books, you can usually get them for about US$20/each. Amazon may have better deals, if you're serious about playing Scriabin these are fairly good starter editions that usually tell you 'if' and 'where' the editor has 'corrected' Scriabin's MSs. I usually restore my versions to what was contained in Scriabin's manuscripts, since editors are usually wrong and didn't fully understand what Scriabin was saying. E.G. Op.13, No.1 measures 34 and 38 should CLEARLY be a natural sign, NOT the flat, etc, etc. (Dover Edition)

Many instructors suggest first listening to a piece performed by someone else before beginning to learn it for yourself. I disagree completely with this approach, especially with Scriabin's music. With Scriabin, since it's so easy to misinterpret his music, many performers actually 'correct' Scriabin's 'mistakes' (I've heard performers do this with some music by Bach as well especially with minor seconds and major sevenths). Scriabin more so than any other composer I've encountered was very exacting in regard to rhythm and tonality. In places where other composers intend a loose figure based somewhere around a dotted eighth to sixteenth, Scriabin will not hesitate to write the figure in 5, 7, 11, 13, etc. So if Scriabin has written a dotted eighth to sixteenth, he means dotted eighth to sixteenth. If he meant in five, e.g. first note for 4 then last note of one, he would write it that way. If I come across this figure above with, say, the left hand in triplets, I ALWAYS interpret this to mean four-against-three, or five-against-three. With some other composers, their intention was to change the dotted-eighth-to-sixteenths into a jazzy triplet figure. Scriabin will always write EXACTLY what he meant - even if you have to count out 17-against-5!!! For this reason and many others, it is of the utmost importance to learn the piece FIRST from the manuscript notes, and then, AFTER you've understood Scriabin's intention, by all means listen to other performances, etc. Otherwise you run the risk of repeating other people's mistakes and misinterpretations which, in my never humble opinion (IMNHO), are much more numerous than accurate interpretations (cf. this example). This happens even by some of the best pianists, such as Vladimir Ashkenazy. It is also for this reason that I would INSIST on starting out with a metronome (unless you can fairly well keep the beat steady without one), THEN only AFTER you've learned how the exacting rhythm was written by Scriabin, then begin to add in your own ritardandos, accellerandos, rubatos, etc, but TASTEFULLY.

You didn't scare me at all! I can't tell you how I crave something different to play these days. In fact, I got so excited reading what you said here that I right away printed off Op. 16 - nos. 3, 4 and 6, Op. 17 - nos. 4 and 6, Op. 52 - no. 1 "Poeme" and op. 67, no. 1.

I read through all of them and I have to say that I really Love them. All of them! Just what the doctor ordered, you could say. They are each so beautiful, I can't believe I never played any of these before! Thank you so much, Michael!!

I could sight read through these fairly well and will definitely spend time to get them learned all the way. My two concerns so far are: Op. 52, no. 1 - the rhythm is a little tricky but how interesting it is - all those time changes! I think I can work it out after some time. haha

The other concern is on op. 67, no. 1. First of all, wow - what an interesting sound. I've come close to playing music like this, but not quite like this. The problem I have, though, is the very first chord - I can't reach it. Do you think it is okay to sort of jump up to the E in the left hand? Also at bars 15 and 19 - impossible for me to reach - actually impossible for anyone to reach. I'm not sure which parts of the chord on each hand come down together. Is that just something that one can do according to what one likes, or is there a rule for this?

Anyway, thank you again, Michael. I love this music and funny, but I don't feel like I'm in/on the dark side at all! This more like brightened my day!

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Not so fast, Monica! Those pieces that I suggested were just to gauge certain requirements/desires/limitations/reservations that you might have. Some of the pieces that I have in mind you might like much better than those!!!

Definitely go ahead and play through those, then re-read my post above and go through them again with the specific questions in mind. We can probably find other songs among Scriabin's compositions that are a bit more challenging/interesting/desirable.

In particular, let me know how easily you can pick up the Op. 16, No.3 and Op. 52 rhythms as well as the Piano Sonata No.7. Do you have trouble with playing in five? With all the Chopin and Granados I wouldn't think you would, but some people do, so let me know. Also, how comfortable are you with figures without easy common denominators, e.g. three-against-five, five-against-six, etc. Because if you're fairly comfortable with those there are other pieces that utilize as such. I really didn't want to scare you off with one of those as the first suggested piece. If I had first suggested Poeme Tragique, Op.34 which was one that I half had in mind (middle period), you might have said "forget it". Maybe that one might actually be easy for you as well.

You might also prefer to record other ones that haven't yet been recorded. At least three of those are already on this site. The Dover editions are a steal. You would spend more than $40.00 in ink alone just to print half of what's included. I'd recommend either the Preludes volume or the Mazurkas one - both if it's within budget.

I'll have to go downstairs to get my scores to answer the other questions you asked, but might be able to get back to you on those questions later tonight (at any rate, by tommorrow).

The other reason I don't want you to go too fast into it is, as you know, some people have sustained injuries going too far too fast with Scriabin. That usually results from them seeing a huge stretch chord and just forcing themselves to hit it from a running passage. Take it slow, then work up into it. Always remain extra vigilant with playing too much, too long, too hard. Scriabin can be consuming!!!

Love is the law, love under will.
Aryobrand

P.S. On the other hand, if you're already almost flying solo towards choosing, I would never stand in your way. By all means, explore and let me know if you have questions. Or I can help you further to find just the right pieces for your Scriabin debut, as you will. Just let me know.

Michael, you wouldn't know this about me, but I am not a very patient person and so many times I can't wait to order books and instead just print off the music from the net. However, I do realize that the scores I am accessing may not be the ones from which you think I should be reading. This has happened to me a few times with Chopin and very recently with some Granados music. In fact, I am currently re-learning a couple Granados pieces because I purchased the new Urtext editions after learning from a Granados expert that I really should play out of these books.

So anyway, I have no problems with the rhythm in 16-3, or with playing in 5, or playing 5 against 6 etc. The rhythm and notes in 52-1 seem harder, but I still think I can do it. The last page of this piece is pretty 'black' though, so it may be the maximum level of difficulty for me. I really won't know until I get into it more.

I'm looking at that Op. 34 "Tragique" right now. It's looks a little scary, but if you think it's a great piece, I will print it out and try it.

But in the meantime, I can barely stand the fact knowing that you may have in mind other pieces that I will like even better than the ones we've talked about so far! You must tell me!!! (please)

************

J - I'm about 20 miles away. Why? Are coming here?

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

If you want me to. The real reason why I asked is because I had to drive I-94 to O'Hare to drop my father off because he is going to Poland for a month. And wow is all I can say. Non-stop construction and heavy traffic. I cannot understand how you are able to have a brightened day dealing with Illinois roads.

_________________Madam, what makes you think that I play with my hands?

I'd definitly recommend all Op. 11 preludes and some of Op. 16. Most aren't that difficult, but I feel they offer a good overview of Scriabin's harmonic language, while also helping growing a taste for some of his later pieces.
Maybe it's just me, but I feel you definitly have to understand his pieces to play them properly ; I've been delaying learning his "easiest" sonatas for ages because I feel I don't understand them yet. To give an example of the contrary, some Liszt or Rachmaninov is much more straighforward to play. Scriabin I find easy to get lost, so I make sure to do a complete analysis before I learn anything, especially since there are so many melodic notes hidden in chords and what seems to be only harmonies.

I'm don't appreciate much his later works, except the sonatas and a few other things ; the poems are mostly wasted on me for now. I think it is an acquired taste.
Some harder works I would recommend and I will want to try myself (after I'm finished my Rachmaninov revival project !), are the Fantasie (Op. 28 ? in D) and the first 3 sonatas which feel definitly understandable (though after reading through them some passages and runs seem impossible). I wouldn't recommend the harder etudes unless you really love them. Some are really hard to play satisfactorily, and that can lead to incredible frustration. Exceptions could be the Op. 2 famous one and some of the first 42 ; I've been trying those and they are definitly not all as hard as the n°5 (though this one is definitly the most beautiful to me, maybe because it is not the most modern of the batch).

Like Arybrand says, you definitly want to work with a metronome. From what little music I've experienced, Scriabin definitly has the most complex and difficult rhythms ; his accents are also frequently displaced. There also are many many polyrhythm (I'd wager to say his music is a whole study in them). Other than that I've sometimes been hard pressed by some contrepoint, and for his easier piece tone control ; for some pieces you really need a colorful and rich tone, dry playing definitly doesn't fit.

Finally, I'd like to say that while at first I thought you could "jump right in" Scriabin's music, it is definitly not the case. That surely doesn't apply to you, from what works I've heard you perform, but for me I definitly started too early. It is easy to completly "misplay" one of his piece, and looking back I regret learning some of his hard ones before having played more of other composers. Not only is it often technically demanding (in a way different than in Liszt I find : it is hard to express what you want because of the constant demand on all your musical skills), it is ripe with content, and for a beginner like me it is easy to get swamped and drown. Since I was talking about Rachmaninov earlier, I find his music is so much easier on the brain and delightful to play ; Scriabin, there are so many choices to make when playing it can be tough to manage. I've yet to play well and enjoy one of his harder pieces I think. For now, I personnaly am taking a step back ; I'll enjoy listening to it, learn some more Bach, Chopin, Rach and Prokoviev, then I'll be back for the harder pieces.

Thanks, Teddy. I appreciate your thoughts. I have not had time to play through the pieces today, but now you got me thinking that maybe my first impression that they are not that hard is incorrect. I will definitely take care when I get back to them and look for all the fine details.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

First of all, pianolady, one thousand apologies and an apology for taking sooooooo long to get back to you on these - I think one of my professors is a sadist, I should be (a little) less busy after Thursday.... I see that you have begun to delve deeper into the Mysterium ... Excellent!

You had a question about playing the chords on Op.67, No.1, but that piece was only an example and not a suggestion ... Nevertheless with the chords there are at least three different approaches you can make:

1. I have this new patented mechanical device which I call the "Schumann Spanner" ...

2. The second approach requires a working middle pedal and is similar to approach #3. If you play the C and the F# with the left hand while playing the E and the Bb with the right hand and catch these four notes with the middle pedal while jumping up to the Ab with the right hand (as with a grace note).

3. The third approach is a little more tricky which is similar to #2 except if you switch the hands (right hand crossing over the left hand) for the first chord and using the sustain pedal. This will give you a little bit more 'flow' to hit the Ab with the right hand. This method can also be done without crossing the hands if that's more comfortable.

Personally I use solution #1! ... ... ((or maybe not) since the left hand chord isn't really a problem for me, after all it's only a tenth.)

Remember this is Andante so you do have a bit more time to hit the chord plus the upper melody. If you use the pedal just try not to let the chords/notes run together too much. This is especially crucial with the Poeme Tragique since a lot of the melody is buried within the chords. The bridge (the part with all those Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon chords) can take much more pedal.

I'd still like to know what is your assessment so far. Have you explored much on your own, and have already decided? Or do you want something a little bit more _____________ (fill in the blank). I don't really remember if we've found something from each of his periods yet. Scriabin only has about 74 opuses, and some 21 other unnumbered pieces (including his few orchestral works - BTW, You must listen to a recording of his Opus 20, Piano Concerto as well as his symphonies Op. 26, 29, 43 (Le Divin Poeme), 54 (Le Poeme de l'extase), 60 (Prometheus, Le Poeme de feu)). Two of my personal all-time favourites are Opus 20 (perhaps one of the most beautiful pieces ever written, and Prometheus.

I still haven't heard your opinion of his Piano Sonata No. 7, Op.64 (White Mass). You might also look through Piano Sonata No.6, Op. 62. Both of these are among my personal favourites although Scriabin is said to have been terrified of No. 6 ("nightmarish...fuliginous...murky...dark and hidden...unclean...mischievous" are some of the descriptions attributed to it by him.) It's for these emotions that I love it so.

I feel very confident that you could handle one of the later Piano Sonatas for an exploration of his later period, so let me know what you think and I'll try to find some of his preludes/etudes where he extracts and develops individual themes from them as a warm-up. As you may already know, more than a few of his preludes and etudes are just taking themes from his larger works and exploring them in detail (Preludes in the truest sense of the word).

Love is the law, love under will.
Aryobrand

P.S. Have you gotten his three Dover editions yet? As I completely agree with Teddy about learning Op.11, I just figured that you would want to record something that wasn't as widely performed. Every pianist should learn (at least) Scriabin's Op.8, Op.11, Op.42.

Teddy, have you previously played through Scriabin's Opus 8 Etudes? It's one of the three that I would recommend for developing the Scriabin 'sense'. Plus some of these etudes can really help a pianist get used to certain polyrhythms that you will meet in Scriabin's other works. Op.8, No.2 has some nice rhythms that when mastered can take you much farther even with other composer's works as well - just try to keep the 5-6-4-4 divisions steady (over the l.h. triplets) for the most benefit (don't alter the groups of 5's to six-based timing either). Metronomes are a Scriabinites best friend.

Also Op.8, No.11 is a good beginner's piece that introduces alternate rhythms/timing. I have a Russian edition of this that lists most of the 5's as 5's and not (2-3: 2 sixteenths-sixteenth triplet) as some editions do. I think the five-against two sounds the best throughout as written in the Russian edition, others may differ in opinion (as did Dover).

1. I have this new patented mechanical device which I call the "Schumann Spanner" ...

No, thanks. I heard that didn’t work out so well for him.

aryobrand wrote:

2. The second approach requires a working middle pedal and is similar to approach #3.

Interesting…I didn’t think about using the middle pedal.

aryobrand wrote:

. The third approach is a little more tricky which is similar to #2 except if you switch the hands (right hand crossing over the left hand) for the first chord and using the sustain pedal.

Again, interesting…will experiment with both these ways.

aryobrand wrote:

Personally I use solution #1! ... ... ((or maybe not) since the left hand chord isn't really a problem for me, after all it's only a tenth.)

Pffff – I’m a girl.

aryobrand wrote:

I'd still like to know what is your assessment so far. Have you explored much on your own, and have already decided?

Well, I just recorded a few of the short preludes in op. 16 an 17. They are in the audition room if you’d like to hear them. Actually, I would like you to – I’d be very interested in your opinion on my playing them.

aryobrand wrote:

Or do you want something a little bit more _____________ (fill in the blank).

I’m definitely interest is something a bit more ______but I’m afraid it may be too hard. Guess I won’t know until I look at it. Also this is kind of creeping me out, but that's ok.

aryobrand wrote:

I don't really remember if we've found something from each of his periods yet. Scriabin only has about 74 opuses, and some 21 other unnumbered pieces (including his few orchestral works - BTW, You must listen to a recording of his Opus 20, Piano Concerto as well as his symphonies Op. 26, 29, 43 (Le Divin Poeme), 54 (Le Poeme de l'extase), 60 (Prometheus, Le Poeme de feu)). Two of my personal all-time favourites are Opus 20 (perhaps one of the most beautiful pieces ever written, and Prometheus.

Haha – everyone says they know the most piece ever written. I will give your choice a shot and put it on my ipod and take it with me on my run in a few minutes.

aryobrand wrote:

I still haven't heard your opinion of his Piano Sonata No. 7, Op.64 (White Mass). You might also look through Piano Sonata No.6, Op. 62. Both of these are among my personal favourites although Scriabin is said to have been terrified of No. 6 ("nightmarish...fuliginous...murky...dark and hidden...unclean...mischievous" are some of the descriptions attributed to it by him.) It's for these emotions that I love it so.

Ok, I’ll put these on my ipod too. Strange that he was afraid of his own music. Then again, Chopin saw ghosts as he was writing his preludes.

aryobrand wrote:

I feel very confident that you could handle one of the later Piano Sonatas for an exploration of his later period, so let me know what you think and I'll try to find some of his preludes/etudes where he extracts and develops individual themes from them as a warm-up. As you may already know, more than a few of his preludes and etudes are just taking themes from his larger works and exploring them in detail (Preludes in the truest sense of the word).

Seems like I have quite a lot of homework to do, now. Thank you very much for all this information, Michael.

aryobrand wrote:

P.S. Have you gotten his three Dover editions yet? As I completely agree with Teddy about learning Op.11, I just figured that you would want to record something that wasn't as widely performed. Every pianist should learn (at least) Scriabin's Op.8, Op.11, Op.42.

No, I'm using sheets I get off of ISMLP.

I guess I will look at Op. 11, but I didn't go there first because we have quite a lot from that set on the site already.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

I couldn't get the op. 20 concerto or Prometheus onto my ipod, but I did just watch Prometheus on Youtube (played by Argerich).

I find it interesting to learn what people like and dislike - it sheds some light on their personality, I think - and that you think this piece is beautiful is very interesting! But I'm sorry to say that I don't. Maybe I'm defective or something, but I heard only about two or three little tidbits of pretty sounds. The rest was non-sense (to me). Guess this means that I should stick to Scriabin's two earlier periods, although I will do a little exploring before I totally rule it out.

I'll listen to the concerto later tonight or tomorrow. Maybe I'll like that better?

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

I think the Concerto is much easier to understand than Prometheus. That last one has many complex harmonies, with chords layered with fourths, "polykeys" parts, and is overall deeper.
There would be many pieces I'd learn before either of them though Just for listening, I personaly prefer the concerto for the same reasons.

Aryobrand, I've played most of Op. 8 (except maybe the one in thirds, and another "happy sparkling one", and it sure is great to get used to scriabin. But you know, even if you can play a piece technically well (or at least ok), sometimes you feel you don't really comprehend what is going on with the music. Most of the harder Op. 8 I feel like I'm letting my hands do the work, mechanically playing it ; I like to think while I play... I keep mentionning Rachmaninov, but that's what so great with him - it is quite easy to really understand what he means compared to Scriabin. Then again it doesn't give quite the same eerie feeling you get with Scriabin I like it when you just know how the phrase should sound, how the harmonies unfold, how the rhythm goes...
Anyways, I feel the Op. 8 is an absolute must, because it trains you with fast left hand jumps (I love the one with that G# E F# - G# D# E - G# C# D# etc octave left hand, n° 9 I think ? with the melody going G# in polyrhythm, and then you have yet another "calm after the storm" lyrical passage), voicing melodies with huge jumps and harmonies (I think it is hard to sound the n°12 melody convincingly for instance). There are a few tricky ones, I had troubles with the one that alternates octave and middle note (like one of Chopin's I think ?), not unlike the troubles you can have when starting Prokoviev Op. 2 n°1 (all great and moderatly hard etudes, if you like prokoviev).
I'll be learning the Chopin Etudes I don't know sometime soon, I feel that might be a prequisite to pretty much everything that came after... (I only play those with fast scale work, Op 10 4,(9), 12, and 25 11, 12). Still on the "I should learn" list, I think I'll have to read more on modes, because I hardly know anything about them (not playing much advanced Bach, no Debussy).

First of all, I began listening to the Argerich and had to turn it off. I'm on a super tight time schedule until at least Thursday, so can't spend too much time now, ... however this version seemed better.

I only had time to listen to the first 2:30 of it so I can't guarantee that Richter doesn't blow it at a later point in the song ... When I have time I'll find a better recording for you. It's like I was saying before that there are many more misinterpretations of Scriabin's works than accurate performances. Just compare the first two opening passages from these two versions and you'll understand what I mean.

Prometheus (assuming I can find an excellent recording of it) is a very transcendent kind of beauty. It's not in the same sense as the beauty of Op.20 (which is what the comment referred to), due to its intensity. It's a beauty that enflames!

Also, I was intrigued and curious by your statement:

pianolady wrote:

Also this is kind of creeping me out, but that's ok.

What exactly is it that's creeping you out?

And lastly, (for now ) I will definitely listen to the recordings you've made, but it probably won't be until Friday or the weekend, but I will listen to them!

Ok, I’ll put these on my ipod too. Strange that he was afraid of his own music. Then again, Chopin saw ghosts as he was writing his preludes.

I just realized that you were referring to the Piano Sonatas!!! Please do NOT listen to any other performer's version of these before exploring them at the keyboard. I can almost guarantee that you will either hate them or think very little of them. To date I have never found a single recording of Scriabin's Piano Sonata No. 6-10 that I've felt was accurate, especially among professionals. There might be a recording of these, but I'm unaware of it, so as I stated before you should ALWAYS approach Scriabin from the sheet music first, and then listen to recordings. I'm not saying that you have to even learn how to play them even decently first, either. Just read the score, play out some of the melodies and chords, count out the rhythms from scratch, and listen to the music in your head first. It is soooo important to do this first - I can't emphasize this enough!!! Even with excellent recordings like Tania Stavreva's Piano Sonata No. 3, you should still read it from the score first until you understand what Scriabin was trying to say.

... I also just realized that maybe it's my insistence upon this that's freaking you out a bit, but this is utterly important. It is for this reason that I believe most people don't like Scriabin (those that don't like Scriabin). What they really don't like, I think, are the misinterpretations of Scriabin.

Ok, I’m listening to the Richter-Prometheus as I type this. And I have to say, it is better the second time around! The sound quality is better on this video too. But I will blame you if I have another bad dream tonight. Last night, I woke up my husband by screaming in my sleep. Giant, flying, scary-looking monkeys just like the kind in the Wizard of Oz were chasing me though some big old house. Seems I was the only person in the house and I think also in the whole town. Something like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. But instead of zombies coming to get me, it was those big monkeys! Man, that was soooo scary! So here I am listening to Prometheus again. What’s going to happen to me tonight, I wonder (and fear).

About the creeping out thing – I dunno…just the talk about mysticism, walking on the dark-side, Pink Floyd, whether I’m ready for this sort of thing, is I guess what I mean. I am curious, adventurous, mischievous, but also chickenous (haha – trying to keep words with ‘ous’ at the end – I mean I’m also a chicken) at the same time. But don’t worry – keep on keeping on; I’m with you so far. (Unless I have more weird dreams. I do need my beauty sleep.)

And no – I have not listened to any Sonatas yet. I think your advice about trying them out on the piano first is interesting. I would never have thought of that. So, ok – I’ll let you know when I have done that and also when I have listened to op. 20.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Flying monkeys, hunh? ... I'll have to meditate over the meaning of this and get back to you on the meaning. You can begin the analysis of your dreams by making sure that you write them down in great detail as soon as you wake up. Think about what the symbols mean to you, rather than just reading an interpretation in a psychology textbook. By thinking about your dreams after making a careful record of them, it will become easier over time to understand their messages.

...
If the dreams continue (and even if they do, there's no reason to fear them - they're just images of your own subconscious mind - religiously stated: they're your Higher Self revealing yourself to yourself) try to picture yourself inside a bubble of sharp crystal, or some impenetrable substance. And if you're able, picture yourself in your mind armed with a sword (or a bazooka; your choice), and if the monkeys return summon your courage to stand up to them - draw power from the Goddess within you, that IS you. Do this right before you go to sleep. Then when you wake up, picture yourself completely entering back into your body as if it were a larger slip-on full body suit. (Like putting on gloves and feet-socks only for the whole body.) Let me know either here or in a private message/e-mail if anything unusual happens. Always write down anything of this nature as soon as you can - it would be a good idea to invest in a blank book/diary/journal for this purpose. This can be VERY useful. ...

The Op.20 shows a completely different side of Scriabin - his overflowing passion!!! After listening to this (preferably following along with the music, maybe the second time - you'll probably be blown away the first time ) you will begin to understand the depth of Scriabin's beauty. All of his songs contain this same passion, he just hides it under a different mask of tonality or structure, whether playful and mischevious, or languid and ecstatic, or ______...

Wow!!! Everything you said about it is right. It's so very romantic. I really enjoyed it. And I also followed along with the score. Thank you for providing the link to that. I don't know if I ever would have stumbled upon these pieces on my own, so I appreciate all you've helped me with here, Michael.

And I am amazed at how much Scriabin's style changed throughout his time. Makes me wonder if Chopin would have changed much had he lived longer.

...about dreams - I had no dream at all the night after I listened to Prometheus the second time, but I had a terrible one last night. Even scarier than the monkey one. Don't know why I am having such nightmares lately.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

I was going to suggest to you for the first time you listened to Op.20 to light some candles and pour a couple of glasses of wine for you and your husband, then listen to it ... but wasn't sure if you would like Scriabin's Concerto so ... It is just absolutely beautiful - truly one of the most beautiful songs ever written (if played correctly ).

Not only is the Piano Concerto beautiful, but it's also one of Scriabin's most difficult pieces to play correctly, he uses a lot of subtle polyrhythms throughout the piece. Unfortunately many pianists just do their own editing job and replace the written rhythms with their own 'simplified' versions. Sometimes it makes me roll my eyes so much, my eyes hurt!

Also about the Prometheus ... since you've listened to both versions, go back and listen to just the first three minutes of both versions side-by-side. This will demonstrate to you the vast difference that it can make in someones interpretation of Scriabin's music

I don't think Scriabin's style or approach changed as much as most people think. Even up to the last of his compositions you can still find the deep passionate romanticism - it's just that if he had written something based on (say for example) the whole-tone scale, then Scriabin would immerse himself totally into the tonality of the whole-tone scale to find that same kind of passionate expression. However, if someone totally ignores what Scriabin wrote, then all phrasing, all dynamics, all touch and tone, all rhythm, even all melodies tend to get lost into a swirl of dispersion. Enough on that, since I'm starting to repeat myself, I think.

As for your dreams... it might not necessarily be the Scriabin music that's the cause of the dreams. A lot of times Scriabin's music can serve as a catalyst to bring out deeper subconscious issues, since he dealt with deep issues that spring from the subconscious. To demonstrate what I mean, try this little experiment (you may have done this before so humor me) ...

Go to your piano (it should be an acoustic, since it's important that the strings are able to vibrate freely), and without playing any notes press and hold down the sustain pedal (the right one). Now, while centering the tone as well as you can, sing out loud a single note. If the tone is centered upon the same pitch to which your piano is tuned, when you cease singing, the note should begin to vibrate the strings on its own. If not, then try again singing the pitch slowly higher or lower until you achieve this affect. You should notice that the note will cause the strings to vibrate fully when the pitch is sung at the same Hz to which the string has been tuned. If you continue in doing this exercise and get really really good at matching the exact pitch, you might also begin to be able to vibrate some of the strings for the harmonics of the tone at the same time (while singing only the single pitch).

... now (with this in mind), Scriabin's music can have a tendency to act in the same manner. Actually any composer that delves deeply into emotional subconscious strata will have a similar effect. The difference is that Scriabin immersed himself so completely that hearing his music played correctly will have a tendency to cause the 'strings' of your subconscious urges, issues, feelings to vibrate. If the performance is REALLY good then some of the overtones/harmonics might begin to vibrate as well.

Now that I've given this long-winded explanation for what I mean, let's get back to the subject of your dreams. The fact that you're having nightmares of late is indicating that there is some aspect of your life that's not quite right with you. You don't have to tell me (or anyone else for that matter) what is the issue, just try to make yourself aware it. This issue doesn't 'sit right' with you, and your subconscious mind is presenting that issue as a horde of giant monkeys chasing you. If I was having this dream, it might possibly be a Darwinian reference to the masses of humanity, and their ideology, or something along this line. However (and this is actually really important to understand), if you normally don't utilize and think about Darwin or evolution (etc) then this symbol (monkey horde) might mean something totally different to you (you did mention 'The Wizard of Oz', so that might be a good place to start analysis). This is what you should strive to understand. What do these symbols represent to you? Was the large house unknown to you, or had you been there before in previous dreams? What feelings did the house give you? Was it spooky, or elegant, or decrepit, etc? Think about the seasons. Was the dream in Winter, or Summer? What do these seasons mean to you? Spring usually means love to most people, whereas Winter usually means Christmas/Solstice/Saturnalia/etc and holidays to others. It is this collection of individualized symbols that your Higher Self is utilizing to attempt to make you "sit up and take notice" of some important message. Usually the more vehemently a dream affects you, the more important is its message.

One excellent source for further exploring some of these concepts is from the book Liber Aleph: The Book of Wisdom or Folly by Aleister Crowley, the Beast 666. He writes a few interesting and fairly clear sections upon the subject of dreams and dream interpretation. You should notice that these 'occult' interpretations of dreams are not dis-similar to psychological interpretations (cf. Sigmund Freud's The Interpretation of Dreams, or Carl Gustav Jung's works concerning the projection of the archetypes). I've posted two links which should lead to the same book in different formats. The first is a .pdf file that you would need Adobe Acrobat Reader to look at, the second can be accessed from any web browser. The .pdf has a table of contents with it and can be downloaded to your computer (by right clicking on a PC, etc - I think you know the procedure), whereas the .htm version is listed in long pages with chapters separated into groups. You should especially look at the sections/chapters that refer to dream interpretation which I've listed below each link.

9. HOW ONE SHOULD CONSIDER ONE’S NATURE
10. ON DREAMS (ACCIDENTAL)
11. ON DREAMS (NATURAL)
12. ON DREAMS (CLOTHED WITH HORROR)
13. ON DREAMS (CONTINUATION)
14. ON DREAMS (THE KEY)
15. ON ASTRAL TRAVEL
16. ON THELEMIC CULT
17. ON THE KEY OF DREAMS

Let me know if you care to discuss the dreams any more or if you have any questions about the 666 materials, or if you just want to vent/etc. I'm rather enjoying our conversation here.

Love is the law, love under will.
Aryobrand

P.S.: Scriabin wrote his Second Piano Sonata, Op. 19 right before writing this and it is similar in style ... (although someone has already recorded it for Piano Society so you might want to contribute a Piano Sonata that nobody's recorded, yet. - I'm currently working on No.10 when I have time to practice (about once every two weeks ))

P.P.S.: The phenomenon of sympathetic vibration can be demonstrated with echoes and the like as well. When I was last in Pisa, Italia, there's a cathedral there whose acoustics are so 'precise' that you can sing a single note, then when you release that note it sustains for a while and you can sing a different pitch, and another, and another. In this way you can get whole chords going at the same time - singing by yourself!!! It's an amazing phenomenon.

I was going to suggest to you for the first time you listened to Op.20 to light some candles and pour a couple of glasses of wine for you and your husband, then listen to it ... but wasn't sure if you would like Scriabin's Concerto so ... It is just absolutely beautiful - truly one of the most beautiful songs ever written (if played correctly ).

My husband gets sort of tired of listening to piano music, so when I am serious about certain music, I listen to it by myself. That's how I prefer it, anyway. (with a glass of wine, of course!)

Quote:

Unfortunately many pianists just do their own editing job and replace the written rhythms with their own 'simplified' versions. Rolling Eyes Sometimes it makes me roll my eyes so much, my eyes hurt!

I've heard a pianist play some Chopin mazurkas terribly and altered so much that I had to shut off my computer. I literally could not stand it.

Quote:

I don't think Scriabin's style or approach changed as much as most people think. Even up to the last of his compositions you can still find the deep passionate romanticism - it's just that if he had written something based on (say for example) the whole-tone scale, then Scriabin would immerse himself totally into the tonality of the whole-tone scale to find that same kind of passionate expression.

I get what you're saying here, really. I just can't put it into words right now.

ok, and now about that piano-singing-strings thing. When I put the damper pedal down and then sign a note, I hear that tone ringing clearly from within my piano. I have a grand with the lid fully open. So I sang many different pitches and heard all of them the same way. Then I even tried yodelling, and heard the whole yodel-chord clearly. Anything I sang rang out clearly inside my piano. Is that what you're talking about?

dreams - I will read that information you provided tomorrow. My eyes are half-mast right now and I'm going to bed. But I don't think my monkey dream had anything to do with Darwin, but the Wizard of Oz has always held a special interest to me in various ways. However, the monkeys in my dream were not black like in the movie, but were very light in color - their fur was very light toned. The house was not one I knew - it was an old mansion - in a state of disrepair with only a few furnishings left. It was bright daylight - sunlight streaming in through the windows and I was running through a large parlor when the monkeys were chasing me. It's still so vivid. So is the dream last night which had no monkeys, but real people - three goons who attacked me in a dark parking lot behind I think a Las Vegas casino. They threw me on the ground and then I woke up. (thankfully, very scary - I'm still a little shaky from that one).

ok, again - thanks for this new dream information. I'll read it tomorrow and will let you know if anything helps with the analysis.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

that pianolady formerly known as the artist formerly known as monica but now known as pianolady wrote:

My husband gets sort of tired of listening to piano music, ...

Sheesh!! Can't you change out his music-appreciation chip-set or at least have it serviced? What I meant, but I guess I was dancing around the issue too much, was that the Opus 20 is perfect, shall we say, "mood" music ... I really really hope you get it this time ... ...

the very same as before wrote:

...ok, and now about that piano-singing-strings thing. When I put the damper pedal down and then sign a note,...

Please don't sign the notes on your piano!!! The ink will get all over your hands when you play creating a most untidy mess. Please sing the notes instead.

...continuing onwards from where she left off (with an annoyed 'harumph' at being so rudely interupted), pianolady wrote:

... I hear that tone ringing clearly from within my piano. I have a grand with the lid fully open. So I sang many different pitches and heard all of them the same way. Then I even tried yodelling, and heard the whole yodel-chord clearly. Anything I sang rang out clearly inside my piano. Is that what you're talking about?...

That's half of the equation. I was hoping that the piano might be slightly out of tune, or that you were an awful singer, cause now we have to modify the technique ...

What you should try to do is sing a note intentionally off-key - the worst job you can do (I'm already picturing in my mind, your husband running from the room, the cat burying its head under its paws, dogs in the neighbor's yard howling ...). Do this with the pedal down as before. The point is that if the note is not centred right to coincide with the tuned pitch, then its response (the amount of its vibration) should be much less. This was actually an exercise I learned back in high school playing the piano for the choirs. The singers could practice pitch control by slowly altering the pitch until they achieved the greatest response from the vibrating string(s). The more centred the tone is, the greater the response until if you're singing the note precisely at the same level of vibration as the string, you should begin to also hear some of the harmonic pitches as well. Basically by singing one note only, you can get four, five, maybe more strings all vibrating through sympathetic vibration. The reason why this exercise wasn't as plain was that you sang in-tune the first time (while autographing the keys), so try to intentionally sing off-key, then compare the response to the response while singing on-key. This was the point I was trying to make.

That Scriabin's music (or any composer's who wrote with deep passion, etc) tends to hit all the right pitches so that it sets up a system of sympathetic vibrations within your emotions and sometimes even deeper into the subconscious mind. (This is also the psychological reason why certain things tend to "set people off" more than others. If you find the right 'button' to push, some people will explode! ) What I'm thinking is that some of the fear reaction is combining with some other issue that's affecting your life right now, and Scriabin's music is making certain emotional 'strings' vibrate, having a tendency to amplify the original signal - the same way that the sounding board amplifies the vibrating strings. I should mention (just to make sure you understand me) that what I was referring to as "walking on the dark-side" was that, as you are probably aware, Scriabin was known as a Satanist or a blasphemer since he delved into the mystical side of reality. He himself was not really "dark" at all (as you can see from his music) many of his themes actually are immersed in light (e.g. Le Poeme Divin), I just like to poke fun at people who see the world in terms of only "light" and "dark". Scriabin was extreme technicolour! I didn't want to say this before, but the reason I wanted to make sure that it was truly your choice to begin the study of Scriabin was the following:

Back when I was in high school and at the University, I adored Chopin. He was one of my all time favourite composers - hands down. One of my "signature songs" was his "Raindrop Prelude" Op28 No15. Then I was introduced to the music of Scriabin. At first I wasn't really all that impressed with everything, since I was basing my opinion mostly upon the recordings of his music by other pianists. When I began to actually study his works from the exclusive point of view of only what He wrote on the score, my opinion of him slowly began to change drastically. I ended up totally immersing myself in his music, in his mindset, even in some of his ideals. Now, after having gone through the Scriabin transformation, where I can hear his music just by playing a few bars here and there from the score, my musical tastes have changed drastically. Sometimes some of the songs written by other composers that I used to absolutely adore, now seem flat, unimaginative, and trite to me. (and here's the part I was trying to spare you from) ... even some of the songs of Chopin of which I previously thought the world. Today if I want 'raindrops' I must promenade through a Jardin sous la pluie. The only things by Chopin I can listen to anymore are some of his ballades, and a few other pieces. I no longer have 'the patience' to go through many of his preludes and mazurkas and so forth since Scriabin had changed my point of view towards music so drastically. I was wanting to make sure that in case Scriabin had the same effect on you, you wouldn't come back at me blaming me for ruining Chopin for you. Scriabin doesn't necessarily affect everyone the same way, so this might not be an issue. I just had to make sure that it was your choice. There's nothing really scary or anything to really fear from Scriabin's music, it's just that sometimes it can have a deep and profound effect upon you, especially in terms of how you look at tonality and expression. Through the Mysterium, Scriabin was attempting to create a transcendent form of artistic expression which included not only sound, but light, and colour, and scent, and touch, and vibration, etc. You're probably aware of how Scriabin wanted to use even the clouds in the sky in his music. Scriabin was in search of a transcendent reality of divine natural ecstasy and brilliant scintillating joy... So you really don't need to fear Scriabin's music at all, it may change the top-ten list of your favourite music drastically, though.

Sheesh!! Can't you change out his music-appreciation chip-set or at least have it serviced?

It’s not his chip that likes to be serviced. Seriously, he hears me practicing everyday, and I also drag him to piano concerts in Chicago about every month. He’s not into classical music at all, so I give him credit for putting up with me and my diverse musical tastes. But when I am interested in learning about a piece of music, I don’t want him around, as I just want to concentrate on the music and not have to explain things. I guess it would be nice if I had a partner/friend who was interested in the same music and knowledgeable enough to know how to follow a score or wants to chill out with wine and listen to classical music with me. Ah, well…

aryobrand wrote:

What I meant, but I guess I was dancing around the issue too much, was that the Opus 20 is perfect, shall we say, "mood" music ... I really really hope you get it this time ...

I get it! See above response. But I will remember to try putting on this music next time the ‘mood’ strikes. Altogether, the concerto lasts about 20 minutes – plenty of time…

wise guy wrote:

Please don't sign the notes on your piano!!! The ink will get all over your hands when you play creating a most untidy mess. Please sing the notes instead

Cracks me up. I told you I was tired when I was writing that.

Continuing...

Well, I must not be doing the string-thing correctly. I tried everything – singing, humming, shouting, growling, meowing – anything I did rang out from inside my piano. Like it’s a cave. Or a big, echo-y cathedral. I hear everything still sounding inside the piano. But I don’t think it is the strings, because I one time stood up and held down the damper pedal and sang an A above middle C and I could touch the strings at the same time. When I did, the sound was still continuing, which means it was not coming from the strings because I ‘dampened’ them when I touched them. So, I don’t think I am making the strings vibrate at all, but only the sound board that is amplifying my sound when the dampers are lifted. (did any of that make sense?)

aryobrand wrote:

So you really don't need to fear Scriabin's music at all, it may change the top-ten list of your favourite music drastically, though.

I think it’s normal to go through phases of being enthralled by certain composers. I’ve been into Chopin for probably the longest so far. I am currently learning and recording all of his mazurkas and I must say that I thoroughly enjoy when I get one down and then go onto the next one. Probably because I think they are all so different from one another. But I do admit there are some Chopin pieces I am tired of hearing, as well. (Don’t tell him that ) I still like watching the pros play Chopin in concert, but I don’t put up many Chopin books on my piano (except the Mazurkas) that much lately. Or course it’s not that I don’t like him anymore, but I need to get into different things constantly or I get bored.

And that brings me to my interest in Scriabin. For me, it’s simply a matter of playing something ‘new’. But of course, it also has to appeal to me enough for me to devote my time and energy. Granados is another one of my favorite composers because his music I think is very appealing. And much of it is playable. Plus, I love his life story. So far, I am intrigued by what we’ve discussed regarding Scriabin, and I am enjoying the pieces I recently learned and what I’m working on now. Will I become as passionate about Scriabin’s music as you are? Time will tell. Will it turn me off of Chopin? Currently, when I’m home alone, it’s dark outside, and a storm is moving in – I still do usually open a Chopin book, first. That seems to ground me in a way and settle my mind. I’ll be surprised if Scriabin one day becomes the man I turn to, but who knows…

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Michael, I just put up another Scriabin piece - the Op.52, no. 1. I think you said you didn't like this one much, but I do. I like the harmonies a lot! But the rhythm was much harder to get down than I thought it'd be. I wrote in the counts, tapped my foot, used my metronome - all that and I'm still not positive I got it right. I'm already planning what my excuse will be if it turns out to be wrong - I'll just say that I was letting my 'free spirit' guide me, that's all. Which is actually sort of true - I did count the best I could but after awhile I played it as how I wanted it to go. Probably none of that make sense, and maybe I've committed a sin but umm....well that's all I can say about it.

Regarding other Scriabin pieces - I have not started another one yet. I still like the shorter pieces, but I need to go back to what you wrote previously to remind myself which pieces are good.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Michael, I just put up another Scriabin piece - the Op.52, no. 1. I think you said you didn't like this one much, but I do. I like the harmonies a lot!

No, silly! I was being sarcastic. I was making fun of people who think that everything that Scriabin wrote above opus 30ish is only atonal noise. I guess if you have to explain a joke, it wasn't that funny ... Sheesh! ... ...

I actually LOVE Opus 52, the entire thing. It has some wonderful (what would later be called) "tasty" Jazz-style chords in it. I can hardly wait to hear your performance.

With this piece, you've now experienced Scriabin's first period and his semi-last period. I'm calling this 'semi-last period', since Opus 52 has a feel that's sort of in between his middle and last periods. I think you mentioned that you wanted to play something from each of his periods, which would leave the middle period (or his late final period, or both). I had previously suggested for you to look at some other pieces and right now (it's 4:00 am) I can't remember what they were ... Perhaps a bit later in the day I'll look these up and post them here, then I can listen to the Op.52, No. 1.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum